Wimbley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is well settled that the ‘State is not required to agree with the defendant that the evidence offered during the penalty phase is sufficiently mitigating to preclude imposition of the death sentence[, and] the State is free to argue that the evidence is not mitigating at all.’ State v. Storey, 40 S.W.3d 898, 910-11 (Mo.2001). Thus, “‘[a] prosecutor may present an argument to the jury regarding the appropriate weight to afford the mitigating factors offered by the defendant.” ’ Vanpelt [v. State], 74 So.3d [32,] 90 [ (Ala.Crim.App.2009) ](quoting Malicoat v. Mullin, 426 F.3d 1241, 1257 (10th Cir.2005)). That is, ‘the prosecutor, as an advocate, may argue to the jury that it should give the defendant’s mitigating evidence little or no weight.’ Mitchell v. State, 84 So.3d 968, 1001 (Ala.Crim.App.2010)(citing Storey, 40 S.W.3d at 910-11 ).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 233 So. 3d 374 - Largin v. State

2. “'Alabama appellate courts have repeatedly held that, to be convicted of capital offense and sentenced to death, a defendant must have had a particularized intent to kill and the jury must have been charged on the requirement of specific intent to kill. E.g. , Gamble v. State , 791 So.2d 409 , 444 (Ala. Crim. App. 2000) ; Flowers v. State , 799 So.2d 966 , 984 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999) ; Duncan v. State , 827 So.2d 838 , 848 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999).'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 263 So. 3d 1076 - Towles v. State

3. ““[The appellant] seems'to .imply that [a juror] should have been removed for cause because one of his cousins was an assistant district attorney. The record does not establish .that the cousin to whom [the juror] referred was involved in prosecuting [the appellant]. -Therefore, circuit court did not commit error, plain or otherwise, in leaving [the juror] on the venire.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bohannon v. State